Filed: Oct. 25, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1703 CLIFFORD W. MILLER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States Tax Court. (Tax Ct. No. 99-10563) Submitted: October 18, 2001 Decided: October 25, 2001 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Clifford W. Miller, Appellant Pro Se. Stuart L. Brown, INTERNAL REVENUE SER
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1703 CLIFFORD W. MILLER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States Tax Court. (Tax Ct. No. 99-10563) Submitted: October 18, 2001 Decided: October 25, 2001 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Clifford W. Miller, Appellant Pro Se. Stuart L. Brown, INTERNAL REVENUE SERV..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1703 CLIFFORD W. MILLER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States Tax Court. (Tax Ct. No. 99-10563) Submitted: October 18, 2001 Decided: October 25, 2001 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Clifford W. Miller, Appellant Pro Se. Stuart L. Brown, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, Washington, D.C.; Paula Marie Junghans, Joel L. McElvain, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Clifford Miller appeals from the tax court’s order granting summary judgment to the Commissioner on Miller’s action challenging the underlying collection activity. Our review of the record and the tax court’s opinion discloses no reversible error. According- ly, we affirm on the reasoning of the tax court. Miller v. Commis- sioner, Tax Ct. No. 99-10563 (U.S. Tax Ct. Dec. 21, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
